On May 23, 2013, at 3:14 PM, Arturo Servin <arturo.servin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I am not expecting to agree with me as I do not agree that we only contribute to standards development. I agree with the substance of Donald's comment. Let me talk for a moment about Adelaide. In March 2000, the IETF met in Adelaide. I was the person who made the decision to go there. My logic was, as Don's is in this thread, that we have a primary purpose, and that the positioning of meetings was largely about where our attendees came from. At the time, the IETF was perhaps 1500 people, of whom about 675 posted Internet Drafts (I know the number, because I sent them individual emails, in effect running a survey about the advisability of a meeting in Adelaide). We had 8 people from Australia that had been working in the IETF for a number of years, and AARNET was willing to host a meeting. Also at the time, about one author in six was from Europe, and we had very few from Asia. So we were operating on the principle that one meeting in six should be in Europe. I took the perspective that on our 40th meeting, we could have 1/40 in a place that we had a few faithful participants that was well out of the way. It was not billed or intended as a developmental activity, and it didn't turn out to be one. We still have a small percentage of people from Australia, and thy are still faithful. As far as I know, having a meeting there didn't affect that positively or negatively. It was a fairness thing, extending a courtesy to people who were doing good work over a long period of time. We now have roughly 1/3 of our attendees and authors from Asia, 1/3 from Europe, and 1/3 from North America. We have a few people from South America, of which you are one, and the only time we have people from Africa is when ISOC pays for them to come. We try to position meetings in those continents once a year, it doesn't quite work for reasons that require an adult beverage to discuss, but we do try. And we get a lot of commentary from folks that would like the IETF to be a development organization. There is a political aspect. The ITU pays the air fare for people from developing countries, and friends vote for friends. This is relevant in WSIS/WCIT/WTF, where the ITU periodically offers itself as the SDO of the future. I won't go into that further, but it is the elephant in the room, and there, I have said it. To my way of thinking, the argument for a meeting in South America is not that maybe possibly we will get more attendees. If they have a reason to come, they will first be on the various mailing lists and contribute in that way, and in time will find it in their business interest to attend in person. You did that, Fernando did that, it's what our Asian colleagues did a decade ago, and it's what our European colleagues did a decade before that. From my perspective, the argument for an IETF meeting in South America, whether in Buenos Aires or somewhere else, is that we have people doing good work (show us the Internet Drafts) that have been participating over a period of time, and - well, we meet where our participants come from, like we did in Adelaide.